Smyrna times., 1887-05-11


gotiate a new treaty with Canada to
settle the much disputed fisheries ques-
tiOn, draft of which has found its way
in the public prints, and is attracting
considerable attention. There is doubt
less no man in America more anxious to
get this vexed question laid at rest
than is Mr.. Bayard. No one who has
acceeded to the Portfolio of the State
Department of our Government for a
number of years has had so many vex-
ed questions thrust upon him, Orrather
awaiting his attention at the very
threshold of his official duties. His
exceeding caution and conversation in
handling these questions has subjected
him to severe criticism for what was
called want of spirit" in uphOlding
the dignity of our Government, Mr.
Bayard has proud, sensitive nature,
and these criticisms together with the
cares of State and mental
labor in coping with the trained
diplomats of other countries has aged
him wonderfully in the past two years.
Admitted, as measured by other states
men that Mr.. Bayard has not been as
wise in his selections of men nor as
quick in state-craft as others have been,
he must be credited with his own
method and individuality of proceed
ure, the result of which is yet too soon
to judge. When the history of this
administration is written in the cool
clear facts of history, Mr.. Bayard may
appear in a very different light from
the impressions sought to be made in
current newspaper criticisms. While
the latter may be chaing, it certainly
will not change him from what he con.
ceives to be his best course in doing
honor to himself, his State and his ma
ton. His pacific department on the
fisheries difficulties in the face of ir
ritating circumstances is in keeping
with his nOn-belligerent prOpensities
and on line with his thoughts and
feelings during the late civil war wher
he was for peace at the price of half O
the national domain. Though vastly
different in every aspect, Mr.. BayarC
in dealing with the Dominion of Canada
with England at her back, is justified
in exhausting every method for .
peaceful solution of the questions a
issue, and if he can succeed in negotia
ting a treaty that will be both satisfac
tory and strong, he will have homo
both from the writers and readers O
to-day, as well as those of history.
The following from the New Yorl
Tribune while milder criticism thar
usual, will outline to the reader wba
is sought to be effected iu the proposed
treaty:
The fisheries correspondence ont
lined in our special dispatches from
Ottawa on Wednesday last contain
rival schemes for the adjustment of tn,
controversy. Secretary Bayard's mem
Orandum ofa proposed treaty embrace,
a series Of futile expedients for defnin,
the three-mile limit and determinin,
the commercial status of America,
fishing vessels in Dominion harbor,
Perhaps we ought to be grateful ratbe
than critical, since the Secretaiy's pro
posals involved no compromise of prin
ciple. and were so unsatisfactory to hi
former clients that Lord Lansdown
refused TO entertain them. Still /
must be sourse of regret to public
spirited Americans that the State Dc
partment should have recommends
the adoption of a scheme Of regulation
for securing to American fsherme
treaty rights which were repeated
denied them last Summer. They wer
not allowed in many well-anthenticate
instances to enter harbOrs for the pur
pose of obtaining shelter from storms
purchasing wood and water and I
making repairs. Every refusal Of thes
privileges was palpable violation q
the treaty of 1918. The department
would have adopted a more dipnife
course if it had refrained from askin
for the establishment of Joint rules n
securing to American fshernmen tn
enjoyment Of ftheir rights. A more vic
orous Secretary would have give
warning long ago that repeated vol
tons Of the Treaty Of 1878 would Il
evltaoly be followed BY the abrogatio
Of the Convention and a reversion
the earlier fisheries compact.
The most important feature Of IN
correspondence, the text ofLord Sail
Dury's ofier to return to the basis Of tb
Treaty without pecuniary indempit,
has already been discussed IN thes
columns. This recommendation fro,
Z the British point Of view is an extrem
eezsion, and yet it must be regarded 3
tDe American side as a proposal to er
GER into a bad bargain. The inshoI
nsneries are not worth the open mark,
lot Canadian Esh. even with the or,
gosterous Halifax award rescinde,
me British oifer is a convincing proo
however not only that the award
COW admitted on both sides to nav
osen unreasonable, but also that II